Hi Steve,
Lets say M = (1, 2, 3, "a", "b")
Does this change COUNT(xsd:int(?x)) from 3 to 5?
- Matt
On 2/11/2011 7:03 AM, Steve Harris wrote:
> I've spoken with Andy on IRC, and he also agrees that it's probably better without it, so the current draft of rq25 doesn't have the error count argument.
>
> Following some discussion on IRC last night, I've also clarified the return types of the set functions.
>
> - Steve
>
> On 2011-02-11, at 10:55, Steve Harris wrote:
>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> Currently the Set Functions in Aggregates (ie. the underlying functions) are defined like:
>>
>> Func(M, errors, scalars)
>>
>> where M a multiset of the values from the group, e.g. if you have SUM(?x) and ?x is 1,2,3 in the group, then M = (1,2,3). But M is defined used ListEvalE(), so all the results which are errors are removed from the multiset.
>>
>> errors is a count of the errors (which where removed from M).
>>
>> I think it would be much simpler if instead M included the errors, and the error count argument was dropped, then it would be:
>>
>> M = ListEval(exprlist, range(g))
>>
>> func(M, scalarvals), for non-DISTINCT
>> func(Distinct(M), scalarvals), for DISTINCT
>>
>> Dave B also complained about the error count argument saying it was redundant in his comment.
>>
>> I don't quite remember why it was included? I think Andy S might have suggested it, something about future extensibility? But I don't see what function it performs.
>>
>> So, my question is, can anyone think of a good reason to keep it?
>>
>> - Steve
>>
>> --
>> Steve Harris, CTO, Garlik Limited
>> 1-3 Halford Road, Richmond, TW10 6AW, UK
>> +44 20 8439 8203 http://www.garlik.com/
>> Registered in England and Wales 535 7233 VAT # 849 0517 11
>> Registered office: Thames House, Portsmouth Road, Esher, Surrey, KT10 9AD
>>
>>